Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to markopoleo
Re: whatever it takes
You aren't just flooding their network, you are also flooding other folks who happen to be on the same network segment. If my ISP happens to be hosting a spammer (whether they know about it or not) and my website is sitting "next door" so to speak, then your flooding of the spammer's site might take down my site as well.
How would it be appropriate to take down my site just because the ISP I use also happened to be used by a spammer? And don't tell me that I should change ISPs. It's not always simple and there's no guarantee that any ISP I go to will be immune from collateral damage in the future. It's not a solution to keeping my site up and running, just a temporary patch until the spammer changes networks.
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ |
|
MplsGuy
@209.32.x.x | reply to technick
By this logic, if a murder is known to be in a large city, it's best to just launch a nuke in there. Collateral damage can be expected, but its the price of justice. |
|
Trakker
Danger
Premium
join:2003-01-12
ß | reply to technick
You have got a lot to learn...
--
»www.cqbarms.com |
|
technick
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Loganville, GA | reply to Samwoo
It would never shut down the whole internet. The whole model the internet is based around redundency. |
|
Samwoo
join:2002-02-15
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA | reply to technick
if the collateral is the entire internet... it is a war i do not want to see. |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| reply to markopoleo
You're not just flooding *their* bandwidth, you're flooding everybody else's bandwidth too.
Somewhere I saw a comment that shortly after that site was brought up some 25% of backbones traffic was based on that tactic. I doubt the number was that high, but it was probably significant.
There are really not that many spammers out there ... but there are now a lot using trojans that make traditional methods of fighting spam like spitting into the ocean. |
|
technick
Premium
join:2000-12-16
Loganville, GA | reply to Minister
In every war, there is collateral damage. |
|
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | reply to markopoleo
There are often innocent parties sharing that bandwidth. |
|
markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to Jason Levine
said by Jason Levine  :Including sinking to their level or lower? Sorry, but I'd prefer to get rid of spammers without compromising my ethics. How is it sinking to their level or lower? Your flooding there network with bandwidth..
They flood you with spam over the same network that they make thousands/millions dollars from hopeless people who buy the crap. Its a injustice of one not to fight back. You think Laws are going to stop spammers? think again. Every 1 spammer that gets caught, a dozen pop up in varying countries ready to take up the cause. |
|
